Is there a recall option in Florida?

Unfortunately, no. There’s a GOP super-majority in our legislature, so even though Republicans hate Scott’s guts too, there is little chance of enacting a recall mechanism now. They may despise Scott, but the GOP isn’t interested in bringing their own guy down, even if he brings the state down on his way out.

The only upside of the horrible, horrible Scott debacle is that it will probably help Obama’s reelection chances down here and ruin the GOP brand statewide.

Ah, Republicans.  Always willing to sink the ship as long as it denies an elected office to a Democrat, even if it would only potentially happen.

Republicans hate Scott’s guts too

Really?  Why?  Seriously.  Since when do Republicans (especially in FL) have standards?  I am sincerely asking.

(And believe me, the necessity to say “I am sincerely asking” is a small price to pay for all the snark-fun and hijinx at this and similar sites.)

You would know better than I, Betty, but I would have thought that the crazies are over-represented in Florida. If that is true, then he has already lost some of that demographic, although the remainder thereof would probably dismess them as “CINOs.”

So Scott will be looking to boost his approval ratings? I see.

[Ahem]

Your attention please: All Florida residents and visitors who who are not upper class, str8, Caucasian males need to LEAVE THE STATE NOW.

I just came to say that picture made me laugh.
Apparently I am twelve.

RE: Republican hate for Scott:

But moist of what he’s done wouldn’t have been possible without the enthusiastic support of the lege, no?

He might not be up for reëlection anytime soon, but now is the time to remind people he’ll have much less power if they vote against all Republicans.

When I saw the picture, I had a flashback to Richard Sanders playing Les Nessman’s mother on WKRP.

@ MikeJ—actually, he won with less than 50% of the vote and with less enthusiasm than is generally believed. Scott had the truly enthusiastic support only of the brain-dead, mouth-breathing teatard idiots, who are a small percentage of the total. But them plus the people who will reflexively vote for anything with an “R” after its name (honey badgers included) was enough to squeak by.

I think a couple of things were at play in putting a hardcore wingnut into office in a state that is generally less wingnutty than, say, South Carolina: 1) Dems were less than enthused by our bankster candidate. 2) A lot of people couldn’t be arsed to vote because they didn’t really think a crook like Scott would actually WIN.

I’ll admit I didn’t see it coming either (though I wasn’t stupid enough to sit the election out). The guy is such an obvious crook. But the momentum was all with the GOP in 2010, and we’ll be paying for it down here long after Scott has been tossed from office. (sigh)

I’m with Dave S.

When you consider that Crazification averages 27-29% nationwide, and how certain markers of Crazification, such as Republicanism, can vary across the nation by state and region, I also too believe that Scott’s already lost about… 27-29% of the Crazies.

Think of it as the Crazification Pareto Principle.

Hey, ease up on Pat Quinn! He did sign the bill outlawing the death penalty and he signed off on civil unions, so for a post-Blago-pigfuck guy, he’s doing okay.

second oblomova re; quinn. not even in the same league as the rest of the rust belt rednecks.

I won’t say Quinn is the most charismatic or visionary guy—but by IL governor standards, he’s doing okay. And much like Obama, he inherited a rats-nest to unravel.

You guys are right. I should have given a shout-out to Snyder of Michigan instead. Mea culpable.

“Mea CULPABLE?” Really, iPhone auto-correct? Sheesh….

The Crazification Pareto Principle defines the point at which a politician can no longer say crazy things that gain at least one crazy for each crazy he loses.